Well, I think you know that I favor the idea of giving the higher seeds a home game, if there has to be an additional game anyway. It actually rewards performance on the regular season, which is one of my primary concerns, that ultimately the regular season is diminished. They won't do it though because the powers that be want money in their pocket, and a home game to a particular team won't accomplish that.
This goes over to the second point... I sometimes trip up on it, but I try to say most deserving team when talking about who belongs, and not the best team. We can argue for instance that 2010 Alabama was in fact the best team. We can not, with any conviction, argue that they were the most deserving. There has to be some element of a team either playing above their level (2012 Notre Dame is a good example, that was a tough schedule but somehow they survived despite not being that great) being rewarded for excellence, or conversely a great team just throwing their chances down the drain because they decide not to show up for a game. That to me is what makes the regular season matter so much, and what irks me about a playoff.
To that point, absolutely, without question an undefeated FSU deserved to be in any championship game. I dislike them strongly, they did play a fairly weak schedule, but I don't see how you can take a Power 5 team and invalidate their undefeated season. The theory is that A: You have to beat someone in a Power 5 conference, and B: If you beat everyone, at least hypothetically you're better than anyone. So, if the regular season matters, then being undefeated matters.
We all now know that Ohio State was the far better team than FSU. However, who played the better regular season? When it counted, or well... should have counted, it was FSU that did. Having said that, once you get to one loss, the logic changes, because a team already bettered you. Then, I think SoS really climbs into the discussion and I have no real issues with saying that in some cases, a two loss team could be more deserving than a one loss team.
But, basically in my line of thinking, who gets into a championship game should be about who is the most deserving, not necessarily who is the best team. I think generally speaking the BCS managed to do both, but there's no question that some years the best team had 2 or 3 losses, and I also think there's no question that if there was a big enough playoff those teams could have erased those regular season results and won it all in a 2 or 3 game season.
